Post a reply

A Rant

Postby snooky147

So, we're into late November and it's time for the UK to start.
Now, I go on record in saying that I do not like the flat draw format. It is
my opinion that it does not benefit the majority of the members in any way.
For those just coming into the tour how is it good for them to be playing a top seed in the
first round time and time again. Okay, they will gain experience yes but in the two seasons they have will they have time before the money runs out due to the expenses involved to stay on the tour. But before we get to that, let's talk about the old system and how it took Judd Trump 5 seasons to adjust before he made the breakthrough or why not Neil Robertson, who in fact fell off the tour before he made his. Does anyone think seriously that either of these players, given their stage of development at the time would be where they are now. No, because Robertson in particular would have ran out of money. I don't know Judd's situation back then but I would guess the well was not bottomless.
But the reality is that we are stuck with Hearn's vision of the future so let's discuss that. The Q School was introduced and the qualifiers entered the tour, That is £1000. If they were to enter everything it will cost nearly £5000 in entry fees alone.(It beggars belief that a one frame shootout in Blackpool is £200 to enter).
On top of that expenses for the season will easily hit £15,000 so you would say that you need to hit 21,000 in earnings just to break even but wait, that's not right. Out of that £21,000 if any of that was china, india or Australia there was at least 20% deducted oh and let's not forget the 2% that the Association levies on any prize money so in actual fact in order to have a living wage you need approximately £40,000, which at the time of typing would put you close to the top 16 on the one year money list. Now I agree that in order to earn you have to win but not everyone can win all the time so I think that prize money needs to be extended down to the bottom. Not a lot, but enough to give the ones at the bottom the barest of hope. These newcomers and journeymen alike are each putting into the sport upwards of £20,000. In my opinion that makes you a pro and pro's should be paid but most of all be given the chance to develop. I know I will hear all the Hearn generated marmite about rewarding so called mediocrity but it's not that. If it has to be a flat draw organise the season properly in order to reduce some of the expenses and PAY EVERYONE.
The following for first round losers would not be out of order and considered a start. Baby steps and all that.

8 PTC's £250x64 First round losers = £128000 = £16000 per PTC
World Championship £500x64 First round losers = £32000
China Open £300x64 First round losers = £19200
Haikou World Open £300x64 First round losers =£19200
Welsh Open £250x64 First round losers = £16000
German Masters £250x64 First round losers =£16000
International Championships £400x64 First round losers = £25600
Wuxi Classic £300x64 First round losers £19200
Shanghai Masters £300x64 First round losers = £19200
Total to find £294,400
I refuse to believe the Association can't afford that.

This gives those at the bottom £4600. Hardly a reward but it's a start.

Re: A Rant

Postby Wildey

Why should losers be payed anything?

Sport is not steady employment like other Jobs nor it should be you win then get rewarded if you cant win get another Job that's how you rid a sport of Journeymen.

For years snooker has been funding players that cant cut it Barry Hearn pinpointed that and set about getting Rid of that mentality

Result = Mark Davis gone from Journeyman to a top earner otherwise he would have to give up..

Re: A Rant

Postby snooky147

Wildey wrote:Why should losers be payed anything?

Sport is not steady employment like other Jobs nor it should be you win then get rewarded if you cant win get another Job that's how you rid a sport of Journeymen.

For years snooker has been funding players that cant cut it Barry Hearn pinpointed that and set about getting Rid of that mentality

Result = Mark Davis gone from Journeyman to a top earner otherwise he would have to give up..


You do Know that not everyone can win all the time do you???

You do know that they ALL worked their asses off to get where they were.????

You do realise that the money structure I laid out is a bare minimum, which after they pay entry fees
and expenses does not cover a quarter of what they put out..??

You do realise that many who would have came through from the old system will now probably give the sport up because they can't develop as quickly as they would have to and dont bother quoting the odd individual exception because there are always some.

Barry Hearn and his Rewarding mediocrity BS will have many a good player who may have just cut it leaving the sport.

Oh and seeing you mention Mark Davis currently 12th on the one year money list with £48,242. How long does that last if he has a bad run.
The fact is mate the tour cant support a money list yet and the only way round that is to do the one thing I would never want to see. Reduce the tour to 64.

Re: A Rant

Postby Wildey

Doesn't Matter how hard they Worked to get on Tour if they cant hack it they are Barking up the Wrong Tree.

and the Ironic thing as far as i can see its the Top players that are the Biggest Moaners anyway not the Players that are struggling financially.

Re: A Rant

Postby Roland

Wind your neck in Wildey, the lower ranked players need a guaranteed minimum income otherwise a year on tour could give them enough debt to spend years in a proper job paying off.

Re: A Rant

Postby roy142857

snooky147 wrote:

This gives those at the bottom £4600. Hardly a reward but it's a start.


I'm sympathetic towards this, but the first thing I'd like to see go is entry fees. But I would insist on a deposit for each tournament entered, returnable if the player competes but kept if they don't without a good reason.

And the second thing is the percentage of winnings that goes to World Snooker should only apply to the higher earning players.

Re: A Rant

Postby Wildey

Sonny wrote:Wind your neck in Wildey, the lower ranked players need a guaranteed minimum income otherwise a year on tour could give them enough debt to spend years in a proper job paying off.

there's no guarantee in Sport sorry but thats the harsh reality its up to them to secure financial backing and sponsorship to be able to make a living.

Play Well win and get the rewards that's how Barry Hearn sees it and i agree with him 110%

Re: A Rant

Postby Roland

So do I in principle but you've got to look after your members. It's still work in progress, I believe the growth of the game is such that in a few years it will be sustainable but at the moment it's not ideal and the last thing you want is players not entering events because they can't afford it.

Re: A Rant

Postby Wildey

Sonny wrote:So do I in principle but you've got to look after your members. It's still work in progress, I believe the growth of the game is such that in a few years it will be sustainable but at the moment it's not ideal and the last thing you want is players not entering events because they can't afford it.

Looking after the Members is the Job of the WPBSA .


Tournaments is put on by World Snooker Ltd and all Barry Hearn Promised was playing opportunities and Earning potential and The Earning potential is there for young players take Kyren Wilson after 7 months he is on £26,752 even without getting a penny at the UK Championship that works out at about £1,000 a week or £2,057.84 per tournament entered

Re: A Rant

Postby roy142857

A further thought, it would be good if World Snooker could find a title sponsor for the 'World Tour' (Coca~Cola World Snooker Tour would sound good to me!) with the title sponsor paying players travel expenses, could make quite a difference to players trying to establish themselves. (Probably wishful thinking!)

Re: A Rant

Postby Lucky

To me I think it's all a bit ideal world thinking. I honestly don't think there is enough money in snooker to support this. If you were designing a sport and calendar from the ground up, perhaps this is the template to follow. But as it stands there just isn't enough cash to go around and make this both viable and fair imo.

Re: A Rant

Postby PLtheRef

roy142857 wrote:
snooky147 wrote:

This gives those at the bottom £4600. Hardly a reward but it's a start.


I'm sympathetic towards this, but the first thing I'd like to see go is entry fees. But I would insist on a deposit for each tournament entered, returnable if the player competes but kept if they don't without a good reason.

And the second thing is the percentage of winnings that goes to World Snooker should only apply to the higher earning players.


In that case the deposits would need to be considerable,

Does anyone know who much of the entry fees goes on prizes?

Re: A Rant

Postby Casey

They could stagger the entry fee depending on your ranking?

Players ranked 96+ pay 20%
65 - 95 pay 40%
49 - 64 - 60%
33 - 48 - 80%
17 - 32 - 100%
1 - 16 - 130%

Something like that anyway. Taking the full amount of an up and coming player and then making him play O'Sullivan in round 1 is like robbing the poor to pay the rich.

Re: A Rant

Postby snooker loopy

You know what they could do, cut down on travel expenses by world snooker buying up a venue for all qualifiers and providing all non-UK citizen tour players (still a significant minority) with accommodation (a bedsit or something) in that city if they need it (i.e can't fund it themselves). They should play all L128 and L64 matches of every event there if it isn't in Europe and all L128 matches if it is in Europe..

Whilst this would come at quite large expense it would be worth it to ensure good quality players aren't priced out of the game.